recogitare.com

Meadmaker wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 7:45 pm

stanky wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 5:03 am I can't recall anything of significance discussed.

I think that will be the general impression. I could say the same thing. And yet, there was quite a lot of things of great significance that were discussed. Economic plans. Donald Trump's unhinged personality. Overturning elections. Abortion. Guns. Climate change. Immigration.

And yet, we're all kind of ho hum and unimpressed. It's kind of disturbing in a way. No one said anything about eating cats, so there's really nothing to see here.

I was coming from a different camp. The cat-eating immigrants would have been fun, but tackling the root of our problems would have been spell-binding. There, it's all fluffy. Only outliers ever go deep. They can't win, but they can effect the dialog. Corruption, aggression, greed, money...that stuff. Global issues.
We've really come to expect almost nothing from the political. Universal health care is now too much to talk about; radical. Simple solutions abound and are avoided, by both teams.

One example?
If the U.S. adapted the Australian's mandatory voting, which would be hard to reject for any politician honestly wanting fair elections, things would be quite different. And a politician rejecting the idea would be exposed as one of the cheaters and gerrymanderers. In recent days, some states have allegedly taken 1000's of voters off the process. Others, in rural areas, will stiffle minority votes with inconvenience or intimidation. That stuff is too stupid to tolerate for how easy to fix. But now, it feels nearly radical to discuss.

We're lightyears away from a global bill of rights. A ban on plastic grocery store bags is really too much to ask for, so how can any real problem be solved? California is whackadoodle for banning froot loops for public school food.
That's the feel on the right. Wtf ? If a kid can't get some sugar and carcinogenic colorings, what's next? No ar-15's at the fair?? Accountability at the Pentagon? Disinformation is free speech, damnit.

There's a werewolf raping a kid and we're debating whether its outfit is appropriate. The outlier says "look at what's happening!" Dismissed as delusional and shunned. A word from our sponsors:

Titanic Brass Polish is the last brass polish you'll ever need.

The right wing is more animated than I thought they would be about moderator bias during the VP debate.

Meanwhile, there's the Jack Smith filing. (I"m moving my discussion here, out of the "stupid headlines" thread)

Seeing all the coverage, I noticed none of the consilidators that I read included anything from Fox News on it. What did they have to say? So I opened up the Fox News page. Hmm.....I don't see anything.....scroll down.....scroll down some more....ahhh, there it is. Five takeaways from the filing. Click on the story: "You must create an account...."

(For those who haven't ever opened the Fox News page, I wasn't aware that they did that. I've always just read the stories for free. I verified by clicking some of the "important" stories at the top of the page that you don't need to give them your email to read most of their content.)

I decided it wasn't worth it to read their story.

What about National Review:

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/o ... -evidence/

Summary: The author points out that in his opinion, Trump should have been impeached, should have been convicted, should have been forbidden from ever holding office again, and is unfit for office. He then explains why this filing probably won't matter, and is surrounded by some very sketchy law.

Meadmaker wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2024 3:18 pm...He then explains why this filing probably won't matter...

I don't see why that's in dispute.

Everyone knows Trump is a vile moron criminal with zero ability to run as mush as a Chinese laundry.

That's why his fans love him.

The 1960s promised the Age of Aquarius, the 21st century has given us the Age of Reality TV.

Well said TA. Thanks.

Admin wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2024 5:33 pm

Meadmaker wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2024 3:18 pm...He then explains why this filing probably won't matter...

I don't see why that's in dispute.

Everyone knows Trump is a vile moron criminal with zero ability to run as mush as a Chinese laundry.

Jack Smith's brief won't matter. Everyone knows Trump is a vile moron criminal.

Is that a pair of opposites like time and space, hot and cold, light and darkness?

It's quite likely that time and space don't exist. Cold also...there's only degrees of heat. Darkness too...degrees of light. According to fairly recent scientific analysis, the one truth we can claim is the direction of the heat flow from a hot body to a less hot body. The rest is mostly speculation.

picky, picky, picky... I was refering to concepts that are inextricably linked.

President Bush wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2024 11:39 pm Jack Smith's brief won't matter. Everyone knows Trump is a vile moron criminal.

Is that a pair of opposites like time and space, hot and cold, light and darkness?

Not opposites, all part of the same team.

You might think it will make a difference, I'd put money on that not being the case. How do we quantify it? Trump being locked up obviously isn't on the table due the SCOTUS ruling, so if you can think of a metric, I'm in.

Trump is a cunt. Everyone knows he's a cunt, and that not just any cunt, but probably the filthiest, most disease-ridden cunt ever to have existed.

And his voters love that.

Admin wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2024 12:10 am

President Bush wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2024 11:39 pm Jack Smith's brief won't matter. Everyone knows Trump is a vile moron criminal.

Is that a pair of opposites like time and space, hot and cold, light and darkness?

Not opposites, all part of the same team.

Doesn't parse. Maybe it's just the start of a rambling old man monologue.

Admin wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2024 12:10 am

President Bush wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2024 11:39 pm Jack Smith's brief won't matter. Everyone knows Trump is a vile moron criminal.

Is that a pair of opposites like time and space, hot and cold, light and darkness?

Not opposites, all part of the same team.

You might think it will make a difference, I'd put money on that not being the case. How do we quantify it? Trump being locked up obviously isn't on the table due the SCOTUS ruling, so if you can think of a metric, I'm in.

Trump is a cunt. Everyone knows he's a cunt, and that not just any cunt, but probably the filthiest, most disease-ridden cunt ever to have existed.

And his voters love that.

(Emphasis added)

As I noted in the other thread, I finally read the ruloing itself, as opposed to media commentary on it.

It doesn't offer him nearly as much protection as a lot of people seem to think.

The whole point of this filing (aside from politics, that is) is to show why Trump can still be prosecuted despite the Supreme Court's ruling. I think the judge will buy the reasoning and allow the trial to go forward. Where it goes from that point I'm not sure. The defendant could very well be President-elect, or even President, by the time the trial is scheduled, and if the trial judge apporves the trial, that ruling will undoubtedly be appealed again. With all of that, my crystal ball gets too cloudy.

I predict that the trial judge will rule that Trump is not immune, although she might throw out some of the points.. Beyond that, my crystal ball is too cloudy to even predict.